Vaniver comments on Don't Build Fallout Shelters - Less Wrong

26 Post author: katydee 07 January 2013 02:38PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (124)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: Vaniver 08 January 2013 08:31:58PM *  1 point [-]

That's fine; I might move the conclusion up to the introduction, like this (my edited version):

Further, one must consider the quality of life reduction that one would likely experience in a post-nuclear war world and discount accordingly. Even if your fallout shelter succeeds, it will only partially mitigate the harm done to you by nuclear war, not erase it completely. You may have enough medicine stockpiled to prevent enough diseases that you eventually die of old age, but the prospects of curing old age or undoing death require medical and scientific progress that require large and advanced human civilization. Unfortunately, full-scale nuclear war is very likely to impair medicine and science for quite some time, perhaps permanently.

Seeking to buy QALYs by investing in a fallout shelter is buying them when they're lower quality, and unlikely to be delivered, and thus probably underperforms other investments.

Comment author: Eugine_Nier 08 January 2013 09:48:25PM 4 points [-]

Seeking to buy QALYs by investing in a fallout shelter is buying them when they're lower quality, expensive

This is highly dubious. You probably have much cheaper low hanging fruit in the event of a disaster, than otherwise.

Comment author: Vaniver 08 January 2013 10:04:42PM 0 points [-]

Removed. You're right that I was double-counting the probably and value.